By DOMINIC GUTOMAN
Bulatlat.com
MANILA — In the increasingly blurring lines between the civilians and the combatants in the Philippine government’s “counterinsurgency” (COIN) program, the commitment of the State to the rules of war must be revisited.
August 12 is the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) Day. IHL applies to international and non-international armed conflicts with the objective of limiting the casualties through two major approaches: protecting civilians at all cost and restricting the means and methods of warfare.
This international law is legally-binding as the Philippine government signed the Geneva Conventions, a set of IHL treaties that establish the legal standards and the humanitarian treatment for war.
Traumatic history of the law
IHL was borne out of the long history of warfare and bloodbath, said Frank Lloyd Tiongson, a human rights lawyer and the vice chairperson of the National Union of People’s Lawyers – National Capital Region (NUPL – NCR), during the Bulatlat’s training on human rights reporting in 2023.
“Much of our laws are rooted in criminality like slavery and prohibition of owning property [in ancient times]. It is the traumatic history of the law,” said Tiongson.
The warring parties of French and Austrian forces fought in northern Italy in June 1859. Henri Dunant, a Swiss businessman, witnessed the aftermath of the war and wrote the book ‘A Memory of Solferino,’ which proposed the concept of international humanitarian action to limit the suffering of the sick, wounded, and the civilians in the wartime context.
Later on, Dunant would establish the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in 1863. With him and other founding members of the ICRC, they prompted the Swiss government to convene a diplomatic conference in 1864. It was attended by 16 states, adopting the first Geneva Convention.
The Philippines as a member-state of the United Nations, acceded to the Geneva Conventions in 1952, signed both Additional Protocol I and II in 1977, and ratified the Additional Protocol II in 1986, and the Protocol I in 2012.
On December 11, 2009, the Philippine government also enacted the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity, incorporating the obligations in the IHL into the domestic law. Therefore, the government fully committed itself to ensuring humane treatment and respect for civilians in the conduct of armed conflict.
Under these international and domestic laws, the protection of civilians shall be prioritized. This includes journalists, medical personnel, religious personnel, humanitarian workers, and hors de combat – former combatants incapacitated from participating in hostilities.
However, the current Marcos Jr. administration and previous administrations have been consistently accused of violating IHL.
Encroachment of counterinsurgency in civilians
“The encroachment of counter-terrorism legislation into IHL creates considerable restraints on humanitarian work such as medical training, data gathering, counseling, visiting detainees, IHL education, and delivering material aid to civilians,” said Tiongson.
The rights violations of IHL are commonly traced to the government’s COIN program, which should supposedly focus on combating revolutionaries. In the most updated report of human rights group Karapatan, civilians became victims of the following:
- 105 victims of extrajudicial killings
- 12 enforced disappearances
- 28 torture victims
- 42,426 victims of forced evacuation
- 44,065 in bombings
- 558 forced/fake surrenders
- 520 use of civilians in police and/or military operations as guides and/or shield
- 7,780 use of schools, medical, religious and other public places for military purpose
These IHL violations are not isolated. Karapatan documented the heightened numbers of violations in the previous administrations as well.
The responsibility to observe IHL lies in the Philippine government because they are the duty-bearers. In the human rights framework, the duty-bearers are accountable to the people and have the responsibility to respect, protect, and fulfill human rights. Rights violations committed by the state can be classified into two: [1] Commission as direct violators, and [2] Omission which is more similar to state neglect.
Human rights groups and peace advocates have been calling on the Philippine government to address the roots of armed conflict and resume peace talks, instead of subjecting civilian communities to various forms of IHL violations under the guise of counterinsurgency and counter-terrorism campaigns.
Decades of armed conflict
Not less than the United Nations General Assembly (UN GA), through Resolution 37/43 in 1982, recognized the legitimacy of peoples’ struggle for independence, territorial integrity, national unity, and liberation from colonial and foreign domination, and foreign occupation, by “all available means, including armed struggle.”
Despite numerous government pronouncements of the defeat of the revolutionaries, New People’s Army (NPA), the armed wing of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) established in 1969, continues to be the longest-running armed national liberation movement in Asia.
The Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) designated the CPP-NPA as terrorist organizations, which the group outrightly rejected. The CPP said they [CPP and NPA] are not terrorist organizations but revolutionary groups fighting for the national and democratic interests of the Filipino people.
With presence in 73 out of 81 provinces, the political objective of the NPA is to fight until the root causes of its rebellion such as poverty, longstanding exploitation, and oppression are resolved.
As a revolutionary group, it also gained “belligerent status” with the capacity to make and enforce their own rules, with adherence to international human rights instruments.
Both the Philippine government and the CPP-NPA are expected to follow the IHL. In 1998, both parties engaged in peace talks and signed the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL). Both parties are bound by the rules of war, which should prompt more rights groups and international bodies to closely monitor the ongoing armed conflict. (RVO)
Read our stories on International Humanitarian Law here: https://www.bulatlat.com/tag/international-humanitarian-law/ 
